Overrated Movies and their awards (Part I)

I was watching TV this afternoon and I had the luck of tuning one of Seinfeld's funniest episodes, which name I do not know, so I'll reference it by calling it the one in which Elaine goes to the movies to see "The English Patient".

I find this episode particularly funny because I relate to it very much, especially the scene where she goes to the theater with her boss J.Peterman to see the movie for a second time (unknown to him). Back in 1996, I was a frequent cinema goer and I had this tradition of watching most movies with this girlfriend of mine, who was also a big movie fan. I had already seen The English Patient by the time he invited me, but I had asked him for a few favors prior the invitation, and I felt guilty for not going with her, so I kept it to myself and went with her as if it was the first time... knowing exactly what was coming.

At one point in Seinfeld, Elaine yells "Quit telling your #$%& story and DIE already!!", which is something quite close to what I said at some point in the movie when I went with my friend. She looked at me pretty much like J.Peterman looked at Elaine and asked me the exact same question "Don't you like the movie?", to which I replied "no! it's TERRIBLE!" She laughed and said "wow, I think it's terrible too! In fact, I thought you thought it was good and didn't want to say anything....let's get out of there!!"

The English Patient ended up sweeping the Oscars that year and it became known as one of the most overrated movies of all time. I understand that the selection of nominees wasn't too great, with Fargo, Jerry Maguire, Secrets & Lies and Shine competing, but I guess it's one of those never ending topics where the Academy Awards simply hand Oscars out to political well marketed films within Hollywood's territory. Ironically, the best thing in The English Patient -in my opinion- was the one that ended up not winning anything: Kristin Scott Thomas.

1996 was not a particularly good year for movies, but there is one film that stands above The English Patient: Trainspotting. This Danny Boyle gem is the one that has gained praise and glory, featuring a young but powerful performance by Ewan McGregor -another overlooked nomination/award-. I also felt that Woody Harrelson should have won Best Actor, over Geoffrey Rush; I've always had a thing for short screentime, and I guess the fact that Rush was playing the typical "mentally challenged" character, he got al the glory over Woody's perverted Larry Flynt. Quoting Kirk Lazarus from "Tropic Thunder, at least Rush didn't go "full retard".

Another weird year in awards was 1998: the romantic comedy "Shakespeare in love" (which in my opinion is neither romantic nor comedic) also swept most awards, topping more elaborate and complex films like Saving Private Ryan, The Thin Red Line, American History X, The Big Lebowski, Festen, and one of my personal favorites, Life is Beautiful.

Believe me, I have nothing against romantic movies. I praise Casablanca, Dr Zhivago and my beloved Brief Encounter, but Shakespeare in love is a riggidly popcorn formulae movie. There is just nothing inticing about it, less enough to earn awards of any kind. 1998 should have been a year when foreign movies should have triumphed. Either Festen or Life is beautiful were clearly among the best films made that year. LIB is a bit corny, but in the end it's a powerful movie. Also questionable was Gwyneth Paltrow's Oscar over Cate Blanchett (from Elizabeth) or Fernanda Montenegro (from Central Station); competition was tough, and Gwyn is a good actress... but still...

To me, the fact that a movie like Shakespeare in love earns the qualification of "Best Movie" puts me in a thought process that goes like this: you might as well give the Best Movie Award to Armageddon. There's just no difference between them. A similar case can be made with On the waterfront and Marty. One is a classic that cemented Marlon Brando as a legendary presence onscreen, while the other one is... well... what is Marty about anyway?

Growing as a teenager in college, I began to lose interest in the Oscars after the 1996 and 1998 Best films were wrongfully awarded in my opinion. Ever since, I have relied in forums and online communities to choose what film to watch. A couple of nights ago I posted my experience of going to the movies to see "Prometheus", which I was already aware wasn't as good as I thought it would be, so I tried to make the best out of the situation. My friends on the other hand -who weren't as warned as I was- kept regretting every cent spent on the ticket. It made me wonder: "Why even bother to go see the movie?"

There are plenty of other examples on overrated movies and awards, but I'll post them in a future edition. For now, let's try not to donate money to the association of golden hair brushes of filmmakers ;-)

Happy Birthday Michael Jackson

Michael Jackson would have celebrated his 54th birthday, had he been alive yesterday. However just like it happens with some music legends, he left us when we still wanted more from him.

In a decade that saw the decline of quality that came from legendary bands such as Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, King Crimson and others, Michael Jackson emerged as an undisputed, imposing figure that became synonimous with majestic, royalty and genius talent, right there on the same pedestal where The Beatles and Elvis Presley sit.

Strange and eccentric as only himself could be, he was misunderstood by a society that to this day keeps labeling and judging those who stand out, pointing at them and rejecting them when they most need affinity and love. Michael was a kid until the last days of his life, and all he did was try to enjoy life as best as he could, doing the one thing that gave him most pleasure: entertain. As time goes by, I am quite sure that his legacy will continue to grow and his presence will be missed more every day, among mortals who weren't able to appreciate him the way he deserved.

The quality that impressed me most from Michael was the energy he was able to transmit in each of his appearances. Without being a remarkable singer, he was able to take full advantage of his voice and use it to the best of its extent. His concerts were more than spectacles to collect tens of thousands of people to watch him sign and dance; his musical videos were more than just random scenes backing up his songs. Michael carried a message with him, similar to that brought to us by John Lennon and Carole King. Michael was telling us that life is simple, and that the more positive feelings you collect, the closer you will get to happiness.

My favorite Michael Jackson song is "Man in the Mirror". Not only it's a musical achievement, transitioning from a ballad to a pop song to a gospel song. It is a strong critique to hypocrisy, fake feelings and vanity all human beings are possesed with. The lyrics...

"the kids on the streets with not enough to eat"
"who am I to be blind not to see them"
"I'm starting with the man in the mirrror"
"I'm asking him to change his ways"

... are powerful sentences with a strong and profound meaning, that make you think about what justice and equality really are.

Michael may not be with us anymore, but he did enough to leave his message on Earth... forever.

Happy Birthday Madonna

If the 80s were dominated by the King of Pop Michael Jackson, one could say that there was another artist who began to rise in her own right and paved the way to establish herself as an iconic legend. Today, that artist celebrates her 54th Birthday: Louise Ciccone, aka Madonna.

Madonna's first album -titled Madonna- was sort of an introduction to a new fresh sound that featured a voice with independent tones from what we were used to listening on the radio. It still had that 80s fragance, but with a more fresh approach, that leaned towards quality rather than new wave. The biggest hit was Borderline, followed by Holiday and Lucky Star.

Like a Virgin is in my opinion the album that started the whole Madonna-Mania. Most people don't know this, but the success of the album is greatly caused by the inclusion of Neil Rogers and Bernard Edwards as producers. If you don't know who those guys are, it'd be easier for me to say "the guys from the 70s group CHIC".

Just in case you didn't know who Nile Rogers is

Rogers had already been working on a successful producing career, getting involved with David Bowie's Let's dance, INXS' Original sin and Duran Duran's The reflex. The songs from Like a Virgin are polemic, contradictory but enticing; basically the three elements any great album needs. The biggest hit no doubt was Like a Virgin, backed by Material Girl, Angel and Into the groove.

True Blue followed as her third album, and it was a more mature product than its predecessors. Production values rose, as well as the complexity and lyrics of the songs. TB includes my second personal favorite song of Madonna: Live to tell, which is an interesting ballad that deals with several emotions such as trust and childhood traumas. It is one of the first songs that saw Madonna changing her appearance to pay tribute to Marylin Monroe. It is also one of the first songs that brought several interpretations of her race against the church, as her live performance features her stepping down from a cross. The album additionally lists, Papa don't preach, Open your heart, True Blue and the iconic caribbeanish La Isla Bonita, which is the first song I vividly remember memorizing its lyrics, as I was shocked when I heard the verse "I fell in love with San Pedro..."

Between True Blue and her next album Like a Prayer, came in the soundtrack of Who's that girl and the remix album You can dance.

Like a prayer was a full shot to the catholic community, by its album, its lyrics and of course the video of the titled song. Regardless, it is a great album that shows Madonna as an artist who wants to keep pushing the limits and also seeks to rise the bar of her personal ceiling. Apart from Prayer, other hits include Express yourself, Love song (with Prince), Till death do us apart and Cherish.

I'm Breathless and The Immaculate Collection are the next releases for soundtrack of the movie Dick Tracy and her first greatest hits compilation. Immaculate also included two new singles, Justify my love and Rescue me, the former being a very explicit sexual song ala Serge Gainsburg. Immaculate went on to become the best selling compliation album of all time, and personally, I can only rank The Beatles' Red and Blue albums ahead of it. Immaculate also contains another of my favorites: Vogue.

Madonna's fifth album kept bringing controversy, but it also maintained quality and success. Erotica was released at the same time than her book "Sex", and as you could imagine,, matched its contents with those one could find in the book. Erotica is a very complex and profound album and some may regard it as Madonna's less commercial album. It also contains my third favorite Madonna song, Erotica of course.

After Erotica, no one was quite sure of what would Madonna release next, having engaged in a liberal war against catholics and sex haters. Surprisingly then came Bedtime Stories, a very pop-soft-ballad toned album that only years later we would be able to understand. It showed a transition between the challenging artist and the evolved artist that would come. Its best songs are Secret, Human Nature, Forbidden love, Bedtime Story and Take a Bow -who went on to win the 1995 MTV Video Music Awards.

Something to remember and Evita, were a compilation and soundtrack released after Erotica.

I'm not sure what Ray of Light has or what is it about that seventh album, but it stands as my favorite Madonna album. I'm not sure whether if it's her best or not, but I do know that if I could pick a Madonna album to go listen at a desert island, it would be Ray of Light with three bonus tracks (Live to tell, Erotica and Vogue). With Ray of Light Madonna begins to drop essential pop and ventures into techo, and boy what a way to venture that is. The songs are nothing anyone have heard before and especially considering it comes from Madonna. The sound is a combination of liberating, freedom, techno, dance, electronic and ambient emotions that somehow find themselves working in a perfect harmony. You can summarize Ray of Light in three simple words: Madonna reinvents herself. As you may have figured by now, my favorite Madonna song is of course Ray of Light.

I could listen to this song all day long

It's always tough for an artist to surpass a masterpiece and this was no excepcion for Madonna in the case of following Ray of Light. However she came really close of doing so with Music, which is an even more reinvented album. It still keeps techno and ambient but it also includes come country and folk elements in it. The entire record is sublime, but I'll give special mention to Music, What it feels like for a girl, Paradise and Don't tell me. Music was followed by another Greatest Hits compilation, GHV2.

American Life is perhaps the only album of Madonna I don't care of. There isn't much worth mentioning about it other than its successful single Hollywood. I guess Madonna was a bit busy being too British.

Then came Confessions on a Dance Floor and it totally redeemed Madonna. It's a great album that evidently pays tribute to dance music of the 70s (and sometimes 60s and 80s). ABBA members Benny Andersson and Bjorn Ulvaeus gave Madonna permission to use sampling from their hit "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme" and reportedly said they wouldn't have given the chance to anyone else but Madonna, who incorporated in the single Hung up. Other highlights include Get together, Jump, Forbidden love and Push.

A couple of compilations and live concerts were released after Confessions, nothing really worth mentioning.

Hard Candy was released in 2008 as Madonna's eleventh album. It's more of a tribute / collaboration album,  that features Madonna working with Justin Timberlake and Kanye West. It's an ok album, from which you can't say nothing bad, but it's also hard to give any sincere complements. It does include a great song which is Miles Away.

Finally we reach MDNA, Madonna's twelfth album released earlier this year. Since only a few months have passed, I think it is fair enough to let time fly, so we can make a more fair judgement on the quality of this one.... as in "I am still digesting MDNA"

So there you go, that's my tribute for her birthday. I hope you enjoyed it and it put you in a good mood to listen to Madonna all day long
.

Brought to you by www.vidacaracas.com

Happy Birthday Stanley Kubrick

To this day, I have seen lots of movies and a lot of amazing films done by great movie directors... and, I have seen Stanley Kubrick. To name Stanley Kubrick's best film is almost as to name which is more important between water or air, or to choose which marvel of the world is the most stunning. So let's pay a little tribute to him on his birthday by quickly reviewing his most acclaimed films (which would be all of them).

1) The Killing (1956): The Killing has Sterling Hayden as Johnny Clay, a criminal who wishes to retire and masterminds the robbery of a racetrack. The film is an adrenaline rush right from the beginning and never lets down until the very end. I do not want to give much of the plot, so I'll be happy to say that the entire cast is excellent and that this movie rightfully deserves to be among the five best films of the film-noir genre. I still pick Double Indemnity as the ultimate best, but The Killing can happily rest as a #2. 

2) Paths of Glory (1957): This is Kubrick's first war movie, starring Kirk Douglas. Some consider it Kubrick's first masterpiece. You see The Killing is a great movie overall, but from Paths of Glory and on, Kubrick's filming excellence simply moves the bar up to a newer standard. It deals with emotions and concerns of the characters, and how to deal with desperation, fear, loyalty and commitment. It is a very profound movie that creates the path of understanding the dehumanization of the mind seen in other Kubrick films.

3) Spartacus (1960): Kubrick's first -and only- epic movie starring Kirk Douglas, Laurence Olivier, Tony Curtis and Peter Ustinov. Need to say more? To be perfectly honest, this film is more of a Douglas product than Kubrick's, because Stanley's contributions to the script weren't as usual as in his other movies. In fact he stepped in to replace the previous director who resigned from the task. Some even consider this as Kubrick's farewell to Hollywood and the beginning of the true mastermind in film-making. As in The Killing, Sparatcus is a great film, but it's the last below Stanley's standards.

4) Lolita (1962): This is where it all begins. From this point and on, Kubrick will cast whoever he wants to in the part he wants to, star or not, famous or not, Hollywoodish, British or any-thing-ish. Lolita is a brilliant, surreal and intriguing film. Kubrick begins working on films based on controversial books, but he moves away from some of the elements seen in text. He decides to use film-making resources to recreate the scenes in his own particular way. He relies on music, camera angles, acting, dialog, script, in order to achieve the results he wants. Lolita's value goes beyond the story: it's how the story is told, the way it is told, the pace in which is told. Like I said, this is where it all begins.

5) Dr Strangelove (1964): Kubrick's friendship with Peter Sellers pays off in what is considered by many, the greatest comedy of all time. Only Stanley Kubrick would have the guts to make a satire of the cold war, during the peak of the cold war. As in Lolita, Kubrick casts the right actor for the right part. In retrospective, I just can't see anyone else portraying the roles of Dr Stangelove: I can't picture another person other than George C. Scott as Gral Turgidson, Slim Pickens as Major Kong, or Sterling Hayden as Gral Ripper, even less anyone in Peter Seller's three way performances. The legacy of Dr. Strangelove is quite straight forward: it's Kubrick's way to laugh at the entire world for the absurdity of the human nature to engage in a war.

6) 2001 (1968): I first saw 2001 when I was eight years old, with my mom and a friend. The two of them ended up leaving the room before the end of the first act, while I kept watching marveled wondering "What in the world is going on here?" Then came the scenes with HAL, which left me sleepless for several nights... even more than Alien, Freddy Krueger or Michael Myers. In the end, my perception of 2001 was one word: masterpiece. 2001 is more than a film, it's an experience; it's a journey that takes us from our past to our present to our future, mixing conceptual art with science fiction. Arguably the greatest sci-fi movie of all time, one can review 2001 in one brief sentence: there are great movies, and there is 2001. 

7) A Clockwork Orange (1971): This was my second Kubrick film and up to that point I had never seen anything like it, or barely even close to it. Of course, I have never seen anything like it ever since. There is so much to interpret, discuss and analyze from ACO, it would take me a 500 page book to write it all up. Only Kubrick can make the viewer experience so many mixed emotions, each one different from each other, for the same person: first you despise Alex, then you hate him, then you laugh with him, then you feel bad for him, then you hate him, then love him, then feel sorry, then love, hate, pity, envy, admire, respect, despise again... you see, Alexander De Large, is each one of us, and that's what Kubrick tells us in ACO.

8) Barry Lyndon (1975): Has a similar effect than ACO, but with less crudeness and more classicism. I think it's Kubrick's longest film, not in terms of time but in terms of pacing -as in, the film "feels long"-. There is a bit of satire and irony expressed in the narrative of the film, which are placed in order to make the viewer feel a more modern sentiment towards the novel. The film is absolutely impressive, especially for its effects and photography -Stanley's specialty-, and of course for being able to show picaresque romance to a contemporary population. It is a different side to Kubrick and it's a side you will end up admiring for sure.

9) The Shining (1980): I guess at this point Stanley was thinking something like "well, I've made war, comedy, drama, adventure, sci-fi... mmm... why not make horror?" Jack Nicholson vowed never to work again with Kubrick, after having experienced the "hundreds of takes" method Stanley was famous for, and when watching The Shining you can tell it was taking its toll on Jack. By the end of the second act, he looks exhausted, crazy, tired, sick, just like the main character of the film should be. The kid Danny Lloyd on the other hand, looks as fresh as a lettuce. It's been reported Danny didn't even know he was filming a horror film. That's quite remarkable: to have your cast work on something they're not even aware of. Just like its predecessors, The Shining is one of the best movies in its genre, it doesn't date, and it is a testament of brilliance, vision and art.

10) Full Metal Jacket (1987): I would say the war genre is the only one where Stanley made two films about. Up to this point, all his past movies fell into different genres, although one can make a case of FMJ. This film deals again with dehumanization -just like ACO-, but in a different way, because in this case it is caused by circumstance and not by actions. The film is divided in two acts, each one ending up with the same result, built in a separate context. As in other Kubrick films, it discusses human nature and questions it. It also rises the question of duality and conflicted personalities, regardless of the environment or settlement. Once again, the scenarios are sublime, and the photography and takes are flawless. In a nutshell, there is nothing bad you can say about a movie that ends playing The Rolling Stones' Paint it black.

11) Eyes Wide Shut (1999): Kubrick's final film. While many consider it his worst (or less great, for that matter), I do place it right there with any other one. I dare. The reason why I do it is because I believe Kubrick tells the vision that any other person wouldn't dare to. He goes where no one has wanted to go, in a way where he can preserve film-making integrity and admiration towards the art. EWS is a two hour journey through the emotions that every man and woman feel but do not wish to say and prefer to hide. Once man realizes the importance of not hiding, EWS will be respected as another Kubrick masterpiece.

So there we go! That is my humble tribute to the greatest movie director of all time. Happy Birthday Stanley and thank you.





Brought to you by www.vidacaracas.com

Chemistry in Cinema Part VI

The sixth film I have selected in my series of blogs about Best Chemistry in Cinema may come up as a surprise both because of the genre and the oddity of the relationship portrayed by the characters. It has elements that combine the romantic nature of "Terminator", the sci-fi  nature of "The Fourth Kind", the obsessive nature of platonic love of "Vertigo" and the sadness of an impossible love from a movie also belongs to my list, which I will name at the end of today's blog.

A Masterpiece

Twelve Monkeys is nothing short of a masterpiece of the 1990s, specifically from that glorious period of 1994-1995, when so many awesome movies came out to marvel us viewers, such as Pulp Fiction, Usual Suspects, Se7en, Shawshank, and so on. Terry Gilliam -one of my favorite directors- takes on the topic of a devastated future world, where a virus wiped out five billions people of the entire population, and uses the same logic James Cameron implemented on Terminator, of sending the main character back to the past in order to try to improve the future.

Like it or not, Bruce Willis delivers a stand out impressive performance. He is very convincing as the physically brute but mentally human James Cole, who starts suffering the consequences of time travelling and dealing with parallel realities. Things begin rough for him as in his first trip, he is sent back to the wrong year -1990-, instead of 1996. Right away the movie gets interesting because you feel a lot of empathy for Cole: how are you supposed to gather information for your research, if you were sent to somewhere you're not supposed to be? Moreover, what are you supposed to do now? Needless to say Cole feels confused and lost, and reacts violently trying to solve a puzzle that has no pieces.

Like I said although interesting, this act of the film tends to be overlooked as 'boring', because of Cole's character development. Here we have a tough brute guy who finds himself a stranger in a strange land, so we get to see the birth of his emotions and the appreciation he has for things that are taken for granted in the time where he is. Interned in a mental facility, he meets Dr. Kathryn Railly -played by a gorgeous Madeleine Stowe- who before anything is a scientist and a woman of theory, who doesn't "believe" in things unless it belongs to sciencific method. Kathryn immediatly begins feeling a connection with Cole... not a crush or love or anything like it, just a mere 'connection' with him, as if there is something special about him.

Here is when we have the believer vs skeptic confrontation, that is the main force that drives the movie and both characters together:

The believer and the skeptic

From the beginning, Cole is a believer. He lives and believes his reality and everything that is happening to him. Kathryn is skeptic to this. She is a scientist and she is firm that time travel is impossible. However as the movie progresses, if we were to graph the strength of the believer and the skeptic we would find that the more time passes the believer stops believing in himself and his perception declines, while the skeptic starts to become a believer and her perception increases. This is what I find magical about Cole and Kathryn.

Despite their strong accentuated differences, they accept each other and deal with each other through a varierty of situations. When Cole is sent back to the right year 1996, he still respects and follows his mission, but he starts falling for his new settlement; Kathryn on the other hand, begins losing resources to prove that Cole's explanation to his presence in the world is not time travel.

As the movie progresses into the third act, the two characters begin to experience chemistry and they miss each other and start caring about each other. They find themselves trapped in a battle certain to be lost no matter what they do; a prime example of this is the recorded message left by Kathryn to the laundry business. This stage is a perfect portrayal of a love that is not meant to be, and even though the characters fight real hard to make it through and even start believing that they may make it through the adversities, we all know what the end is going to look like.

Cole -the believer- loses faith in his beliefs as time goes by....
Kathryn -the skeptic- believes more and more as time goes by...

By the time we reach the final act, Karthryn is now the believer and Cole is the skeptic. Amazingly, it is this switch of perception what made the relationship grow between them, and it is why it is so depressing to see them part ways the way they do. They did everything they could that was in their hands up until the last minute and us viewers are true witnesses of it.

Twelve Monkeys is a supreme effort on how to merge different genres into one single cinematic piece, that is able to deliver a strong message in each particular message. The main plot is sci-fi -no doubt about it- but the topic of an impossible love has been treated in a very compelling way. It has a bit of resemblance with the movie that I will write about in my next entry about Chemistry in Cinema, that also deals with an impossible love: "Brief Encounter".

Chemistry in Cinema Part V

City Lights, Moonlightning and The Secret in their Eyes have been so far my picks for best chemistry on screen. Today it's time a fourth one and what a classic it is: the tale of Dr. Hannibal Lecter and Clarice M. Starling in The Silence of the Lambs, one of only three movies who swept the big five categories at the Oscars.

Onf of the greatest films of all time, also has one of the best chemistry of all time

Granted that Anthony Hopkins appears for less than 20 minutes, the majority of that time is split between two frames: when he's with someone else, and when he's with Clarice Starling. Their relationship is quite complex and profound, despite the few encounters that they have and the short amount of time they share together. All in all, there are evident emotions taking place between the two of them and that's why I would like to explore them.

At first Clarice (brilliantly portrayed by Jodie Foster), looks at Dr. Lecter like a respectable, dangerous human being, but she also sees in him a superior entity. It takes only a few minutes for young Clarice to feel butterflies in her stomach out of sheer admiration for the man whom she's seeking help from. It all happens too fast because Dr. Lecter shakes her ground so bad, that he seizes control of the relationship and over her. This is a person that knows Clarice even better than herself and this is something that Clarice has never experienced before, not even at any level of her college education or her training at the FBI. Clarice is fragile, innocent, but not dumb by any means or easily impressed. She never discusses or shows any sign of personal emotion regarding love for someone, but if there is something quite clear is that the feelings she developed for Dr. Lecter worked to make her a better professional and a better person. The same applies for Hannibal.

There is no doubt Dr. Lecter lives a very boring life. Trapped in a cell with breathing holes and no visitors, no contact whatsoever and perhaps the last time he saw a female individual was when he voted for Ronald Reagan's presidential election. Would his reaction been the same had another female agent would have shown up at his cell instead of Clarice? It is possible, but the way the movie shows him, I deem it as unlikely. The first impression that Clarice makes on him shakes his ground too, just as good as he shakes hers. He smells her, he analyzes her clothing, and he becomes fascinated by her simplistic beauty. For Hannibal, being able to see Clarice for even one second is the highlight of his week. He brings out the best out of her and she does the same to him, even though the psychiatrist persona looks rude and not sympathetic.

Then we have their chemistry. The movie has exactly four instances in which Hannibal and Clarice are on screen together.

#1. When they first meet: this is a very formal introduction, where Dr. Lecter initially despises Clarice and tries to fold the bluff the FBI protege sent to study him. Then something happens when Dr. Lecter's cell neighbor does something disrespectful to young Clarice, and this then is the turning point that humanizes Hannibal and his feelings for her.

"Come closer.... CLOSER"

#2. Their second encounter: a major accomplishment for any individual to be granted a second meeting with Hannibal. One does wonder, has young Clarice broken through his tough shield and finally get to a personal level with him? Probably. If Dr Lecter accepted to help her it's because he feels correspondence for the first time in many years.

Dr. Lecter

#3. Clarice sends the Senator's proposal: a very interesting scene that has quite profound meaning. Clarice brings an offer that would transfer Dr. Lecter to a more suitable institution, which can be interpreted as an instrument of temptation that can be even traced back to biblical significance. She uses her feminine charm to get something she wants and he uses her charm to get something he wants.

The face of reflection

#4. Their last meeting: a memorable moment in the movie and a classic scene that transcends into cinema history. When Dr. Lecter rubs his finger against Clarice, you actually see for the first time the one and only sign of the connection the two of them share. Nobody notices this, but this is the unique time in which Dr. Lecter and Clarice have physical contact. It is enough to make an ever lasting impression on both of them.

"Goodbye Clarice...."

The Bonus: I'm not quite sure and I've never been able to completely figure out how Hannibal found the phone number for the FBI's ballroom, but perhaps this is an every day thing for a man of his intelligence, even counting in the time difference. The brief call is a perfect closure for a relationship that could have never been. I for one believe Dr. Lecter had a tough time hanging up the phone just as Clarice did, but the difference is that he didn't actually have a choice. It was either his survival or put in jeopardy his hard obtained freedom.

"Dr Lecter.... Dr Lecter... Dr Lecter...."
He's gone forever and that's how it should have been. Shame on that sequel.

Silence of the Lambs is mainly a crime/drama/mystery movie and it rightfully deserved any award it was nominated for and won. It is a realistic movie in the sense of two people who meet, get to know each other, end up liking each other and briefly, just briefly, fall in love. Like I said earlier, it is not meant to last, but it wasn't intended to. And that's the way how things are in life sometimes.

PS. As a side note, there is a lot of talk of Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins brilliant performances; I also think Ted Levine was nothing short of genius in his portrayal of Buffalo Bill, and is one of the most underrated acting jobs of all time.

"Was she a very big fat person?"
That line is hilarious

Chemistry in Cinema Part IV

So far I have Moonlightning and The Secret of Their Eyes as two of my best onscreen chemistry I have seen in cinema. I'm still trying to decide on how many blogs I'll do; one thing is for sure, I don't want to force a number, meaning that it won't be the usual "Top 10" or "Top 5"... countdown. Whether if it's six, seven, five or eight, as long as I write about the ones I feel deserve the distinction and you like them, I'll be happy about it. Today it's time to name the next one: The Tramp and The Flower Girl from City Lights.

City lights was the first movie that found Charlie Chaplin under the pressure of having to release a movie with sound in a time where silent films were dying, yet Charlie was able to get a way with it and keep it silent, so you have to have an open mind if you are going to watch it, especially if it's your first silent film.

City lights is a love story about Chaplin's signature character The Tramp, who falls in love with a blind girl who sells flowers. Through a series of odd occurrences -that are subplot of the movie- she begins picturing him as someone he's not: rich, elegant, classy, and the circumstances that drive every scene keep reinforcing that in her world.  It deals with many of the subjects that surround complicated relationships, such as hope, dreams and expectations, obstacles and how to overcome them, sacrifice, acceptance and rejection, and of course the feeling of wanting the better for the person you love.

The Tramp and The Flower Girl

Like another movie I'm thinking of including in my list -but I won't spoil yet-, The Tramp and The Flower Girl do not share much screen time together because the movie is mainly about The Tramp's adventures, and I may be crossing the line here when I say that I get the sensation the movie has a very egocentric nature around him; but... every time he's in the same frame with the Flower Girl, his character diminishes and they actually get to equal level. And it's not particular importance or relevance in the film, but how they both seem to talk the same language and share the same feelings, which is what chemistry is all about.

The Tramp boxing for love

The characters are as solid as you can imagine. The Tramp is... well, The Tramp. He is loyal to his routine and to his habits that made him so lovable by audiences. It is Virgina Cherrill who steals every scene she's in. Virginia Cherrill is The Flower Girl by definition. She is very effective in transmitting the emotional charge her persona, as well as the dreams and thoughts that surround her. It's amazing how with her talent, she retired from acting after a couple of years; it's even more amazing that she and Charlie Chaplin did not get along, and that Charlie even fired her at one point during production.

The Flower Girl... her ground has been shaken

I don't want to spoil much of City lights, but I will say that the ending is one of the best I have seen in my life, regardless of the genre. There are countless threads in many boards and public forums trying to come up with an answer of what the ending means and moreover, what happens next. I think that knowing Chaplin and understanding his genius when filming, he probably wanted to transmit that precise feeling that we get once the end hits the screen, and that starts all this debate around the future of both characters.

Chemistry in cinema - Part III: The Secret in Their Eyes

I came across The secret in their eyes a couple of years ago after a recommendation from a friend with similar taste in movies than mine. It is crime/drama movie from Argentina that covers a lot of subjects, including the main plot being an unresolved crime, injustice, corruption, friendship, platonic love, and finally love. For those who are Oscars fan, it won the Academy Award for Best Foreign movie in 2010.

It stars Ricardo Darin as Benjamin Esposito, a retired counsel who decides to write a novel based on an unsolved murder of a young woman that took place when he was in the force about 20 years earlier, right around the same time a new boss was assigned to run his department, Irene Hastings (played by Soledad Villasmil). As Benjamin starts investigating and doing research to document his novel, he runs across a lot of people who worked with him during the case back then and of course his former boss, who is now a married woman mother of two, while he on the other hand is single and alone.

Benjamin and Irene in the present time of the movie.

As you can expect from a movie I am considering as one of the best chemistry seen onscreen, right from the start you know that there is something between Benjamin and Irene. They may have not been together or even tried to be since they knew each other, but you can tell they are fond for each other. The movie flashbacks to a young Irene starting to work as boss of the bureau, after attending to college abroad Argentina soil -Harvard-, and taking over a department filled with "blue collar" workers, who for one or another reason couldn't afford to get a higher education, including Benjamin, and now have to answer to the noble Irene, who comes in a bit as a snob from a rich family. She dresses nice and expensive and her manners suggest that there is no way in life she could fall in love with someone like Benjamin, and she doesn't -at least not in the common cliche Hollywood way-, but pretty slowly they start to develop chemistry between them. At one point Irene and Benjamin work together in an interrogation of a subject and it in this moment when I think they begin to have feelings for each other.

The kiss they do not share.

The dialogues of the characters are well written and not cheesy at any time. They are based on the premise of a man and a woman who fight very hard maintain a professional relationship. They know things may get complicated if they let their personal relationship grow, and this is despite from coming from different worlds and have completely different backgrounds. She is an attractive beautiful woman, he is barely an average looking guy; she is rich, he is not; she went to Harvard, he didn't; she is a noble, he is a worker. In a key scene of the movie, Benjamin and Irene have zeroed in a suspect of the murder, a low level enforcement employee who has a patron in a corrupt District Attorney. The couple decides to confront the D.A. who in turn apart from reminding them they have no evidence against his protege, confronts Benjamin and makes him realize that his passion towards the resolution of the case is geared by the even stronger passion he has for Irene; however the fact that "he is Benjamin Esposito (implying a poor nobody random guy) and she is Irene Hastings (implying a wealthy noble woman of stature)." I am not going to spoil the next scene right after it, but I will say it has a lot of impact on both characters and the audiences as well.

The scene I will not spoil. It's up to you to watch.

The movie goes on under the plot of the murderer, and eventually it finds a place where to put Benjamin and Irene together, only that they don't get a chance to be with each other and instead end up separated until the present time where the movie takes place with Benjamin researching his novel and Irene wondering of what would have happened had they chosen to be together.

The ending is comforting for audiences because it doesn't feel forced at any time. It transmits a feeling that has been surrounding the entire movie atmosphere and that is also a main ingredient in the lives of every human being: hope. It also has one of the best end line I have heard in any movie: "Shut the door."

A blog about the Oscars

And the Oscar goes to...

Last Sunday was the night of the Academy Awards and just as always, there were agreements and disagreements with some of the Oscars, yet it is still highly regarded as the most important event in the film industry. Now, does the hype live up to the real thing?

I don't want to talk specifically about last night, but I will take a couple of examples from it to illustrate some of my points. Perhaps the most evident is Meryl Streep finally winning her third Oscar; I was kind of surprised that in her acceptance speech she didn't say something like "well, I guess I have proven that nobody loses seventeen Oscar nominations." Needless to say that an actress of Streep's caliber doesn't need an Oscar (or any other award) to be recognized as the actress of the year, or as one of the greatest actress of all time. Christopher Plummer was also a winner on Sunday night, on his second nomination -which came three years ago-. Among the losers, Glenn Close, Kenneth Branagh and one of my favorite actors, Gary Oldman, all of them Oscar worthy on many of the roles they have portrayed through their career. All of this added to editions from previous years, adds up to the fact that it is hard to recognize and hand what is known as one of the most prestigous awards, to people who may deserve it in such a difficult and competitive environment.

One of the greatest actresses of all time picks up her third Oscar.

Michael Jordan was NBA Finals MVP
six times. That's the advantage of sports
awards: objectivity.

The problem with the Oscars in my opinion is that it is an award based on subjective opinions rather than clear down to Earth facts. Sportsmen have the luxury of having tournaments or leagues where they are able to compete against each other in order to determine who is the best; yet even with doing those events, there is still controversy when people include other aspects that may affect the performance of the athlete when compared against another. It's like comparing the 1927 New York Yankees against the 1998 New York Yankees... which team is better? But, when it comes to punctual year nominations of finding out who is best or most valuable, or had the best performance, there are always several statistics that play in favor of making an educated decision. As far as I can remember, I can't picture a single election of a "Most Valuable Player" or a "Cy Young", that gave the award to the wrong person. The same applies to basketball, football, and other sports. Normally the athlete who has the most impressive stats is the one who wins, because stats reflect dominance over their competitors.

This is why measuring who is the best actor on a lead role is not only difficult, but hard to select on an objetive basis. Personally, to this day I cannot understand how Ellen Burstyn did not win the Oscar for best atress in a leading role in 2001 when she lost to Julia Robert's Erin Brockovich. I have nothing against Julia -I actually think she is a good actress- and the other nominees, but I try to come up with reasons to justify her win and I think that the reason why Ellen did not win was due to insufficient marketing on her character and promotion of the movie for which she was nominated: Requiem for a Dream, which is a very brilliant but dark and controversial film that tells the story of four drug addicts and how their lives become more miserable with the growth of their addiction. Maybe Sarah Goldfarb's character was too dark and depressing for the Academy to handle, but hands down it's one of the greatest -if not the greatest- female acting interpretations I have seen in my life.

Ellen Burstyn should have won not one, but two Oscars for her portrayal of Sara Goldfarb in Requiem for a Dream.
Instead, she lost to Julia Robert's one-dimensional character who tells the same story of overcoming obstacles.

I can't get the video to post in the blog but watch this clip 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3OK0KgXjmk

I hope it doesn't get removed...

Furthermore, Requiem for a Dream was Darren Aronofsky's second movie.and I dare anyone to tell me that the directing effort achieved in this film wasn't worth at least an Oscar nomination. I think that because it showed something too creative, too original, something that was fresh and new, the academy passed on it, and didn't appreciate it in its own time. Just last year Darren earn the nomination that had been evading him with all his films, with his gem Black Swan; he lost though to King's Speech's Tom Hooper, which is in my opinion a very conventional movie with nothing new or flamboyant to brag about how great the direction was.

"Yes, and thanks for bringing the beers the
other night. Here's your Nobel Prize"
Perhaps the most controversial
Nobel Prize award of all time.

Well, I guess we can take consolation on the fact sometimes even science makes the mistake of not appreciating genious in their own time too: did you know that Albert Einstein didn't win the Nobel Prize for his General Relativity theory. He was awared the Nobel Prize for one of his least important contributions to physics, because General Relativity was either too complex to understand or not entirely accepted by scientists back then. What were they thinking? It was like:

Nobel Prize Commetee: "Well, you're definitely the greatest genius that has graced our planet since Isaac Newton, and your General Relativity theory allows us to understand how the universe works and how can we use physics to comprehend science, but... it's just TOO GOOD for us. So here, we'll just hand you the Nobel Prize for doing a great job cleaning those letrines in the basement of the building." Crazy.

Of course, I'm just making a bit of fun out of the situation. I can't place the Academy Awards in the same level of the Nobel Prize; to put things in perspective, I don't think there have been many controversial decisions on Nobel Prize winners. But if you think about the Einstein example, who is not to say something similar happens with the Oscars? Maybe the Academy tought something like "Well, it's been seventeen Meryl Streep nominations, I guess we should finally give it to her." Give or take, there are similar examples in the Oscars' past events. Let's name a few of those, along with some where I believe the winner was the right choice:

The man

Stanley Kubrick -one of the greatest directors of all time- won just one oscar, and it was for Best Special Effects for 2001. He was nominated for best director for

• Dr Strangelove (lost to George Cukor for My Fair Lady). Stanley should have won.
• 2001 (lost to Carol Reed  for  Oliver!). Stanley should have won.
• Clockwork orange (lost to William Friedklin  for  The French Connection). Close call. 
• Barry Lyndon (lost to Milos Forman  for  Cuckoo's nest). Milos won fare and square. 

Tommy Lee Jones (The Fugitive) won Best Actor in a Supporting Role over Ralph Fiennes for Schindler's list. I think Tommy is a terrific actor and he nails it as the Fed Marshal. But seriously, over Fiennes?

If there is one year where Akira Kurosawa should have won was in his only nomination in 1986 for Ran. He lost though to Sydney Pollack's Out of Africa.

1976 is a very interesting year as many categories were very close call.

One of only three movies to
sweep the five main
Oscars categories

• Best Director between Kubrick, Robert Altman, Federico Fellini and Sidney Lumet, with Milos Forman winning, fare and square in my opinion.
• Best actress was a very close call between Louise Fletcher for Cuckoo's nest against Isabelle Adjani for Adele H. The real upset for Isabelle is losing in 1990 to Jessica Tandy's Driving Miss Daisy. Unacceptable.
• Best actor between Jack Nicholson for Cuckoo's and Al Pacino for Dog Day Afternoon is one of those where you wish both of them should have won. Despite I agree that Jack runs a show of his own and it was a good win, I believe Pacino's performance in DDA is one of the best five in the history of cinema.
• Best movie between Cuckoo's nest, Barry Lyndon and Dog Day Afternoon, was unfair for any of them to lose.

Robert De Niro is an interesting case too: perhaps the greatest actor of his generation, he has "only" been nominated six times, winning twice for Raging Bull and The Godfather II.

• He lost the nomination for Taxi Driver against Peter Finch. Close call, but I would have gave it to De Niro.
• He lost the nomination for Awakenings against Jeremy Irons. Close call, but in the end it was the right choice. Jeremy is superb in Reversal of Fortune. A must see movie, Claus von Bulow is a fascinating character.
• De Niro wasn't nominated for his performances in Goodfellas, Heat, Once upon a time in America, 1900, .Brazil or Casino. I find this unbelievable, as I like to quote a friend of mine from college: "De Niro is the only man who could earn an Oscar nomination for portraying a McDonalds cashier.

Frank Capra won three Best Director Oscars, but he lost when nominated for It's a Wonderful Life, against The Best Years of Our lives. This was a very close call, as David Lean was nominated too with Brief Encounter.

Laurence Olivier won just one Oscar (for Hamlet) in eleven nominations.

• He lost to James Stewart for The Philadelphia story. Close call but fair enough.
• He lost to Yul Brynner for The king and I. mmmmm
• He lost to Burt Lancaster for Elmer Gantry.
• He lost to Lee Marvin for Cat Ballou.
• He also lost to Marlon Brando's Godfather. Ironcally Brando didn't even accept the award.

Alfred Hitchcock NEVER won an Oscar. He was nominated for Psycho, Rear Window, Spellbound, Lifeboat and Rebecca.

Francis Ford Coppola lost Best Director for The Godfather, to Cabaret. Really?

Chicago won Best Picture in 2003 over Gangs of New York and The Pianist. What's "Chicago" anyway? Does anyone remember what's this movie about?

...and my favorite fact from the Oscars: Tron -the original 1982 film- was not nominated for Special Effects, because the Academy felt that using computers was cheating.

So there you have it.... some examples of crazy facts about the Oscars winners and losers. Which is your favorite one? Do you have one that is not in the list?

Chemistry in cinema - Part II: Moonlightning

What's this, a TV series? Yes. Surprised? I wanted to begin my series of Chemistry in Cinema, with something unexpected and Moonlightning has a lot of merits to be mentioned in my list, including Bruce Willis with hair in a comedic role.

David Addison and Maddy Hayes.
Yes, that is Bruce Willis

Moonlightning was a TV series that lasted about five seasons from 1985 to 89. It stars Cybill Shepperd portraying Maddy Hayes, a former model who decides to open up a detective agency after her modeling agent took off with her money, and a young up and coming Bruce Willis as David Addison, as a bright detective who always has a way with words and solving the cases that are brought to them.

I used to watch this show regularly when I was a kid and it was good enough to make me understand relationships between a man and a woman. David would always make Maddy "mad" and they would both slam the doors of their offices every time they had a discussion (which was about twice an episode) to try to express themselves and drain some of the real tension that grew between them every episode. I even remember an episode where Maddy slams her door in anger, opens it up yells something at David so he can open his, and then she slams hers again. It was hilarious.

David mocking Maddy.
Bruce Willis was hilarious in this series.

Another decisive element that helped build up the perception of us viewers of the chemistry of the stars was Al Jarreau's signature soundtrack, the Moonlightning theme. Despite it being played over and over during the key tension scenes between Maddy and David, it never got old. It served the purpose of remind us that love was slowly building up.

I like this picture because it
summarizes very well
David and Maddy's personality

While a bit monotonous and with several plot holes in many of the episodes, the series grew stronger with the basis of actually having a man and a woman running a company and trying not to fall in love for each other, despite the fact that they actually could. The interesting relation was subject to the pressure of having to solve a case, work under the same roof, share past experiences about boy/girlfriends, and cope with the fact that Maddy liked a guy like David and David liked a girl like Maddy. Maddy's bad mood (she was always pissed off) and David's careless personality, resulted in them complementing each other and working effectively and function as a team. The more they spent time together, the more admiration grew for each other. It got to the point where the relationship surpassed the co-worker level, the friends level, and got to the emotional level after three seasons.

Ironically, the series tanked as soon as Maddy and David decided to "go for it" and became boyfriends, and you could see why because it was something that wasn't really supposed to happen, so it got cancelled after poor ratings. Through its run, it was nominated and won dozens of awards. Bruce Willis won an Emmy as outstanding lead actor.

While there were rumors about a movie, Moonlightning never made it to the big screen. However through over 60 episodes, it does feature one of the best chemistry relations I have seen in my life and that is why I include it on my list. If you ever have a chance, try to watch some of the earlier episodes and let me know what you think.

The next one will be a movie for sure. Which one would you bet I will be doing?

Chemistry in cinema Part 1

A lot of people like to go to the movies and have a good time. This means to actually be able to see a good film, so that you can collect experiences or comment on it with your friends.

From my experience, there are a lot of expectations in this scenario, and depending of the genre expectations can be either higher or lower. One of the aspects that are always target of critics is the chemistry between the couple starring in the movie: 

Diane and Woody are great in Annie Hall

"You had me at Hello" is no doubt a classic line.
But is the couple Jerry and Dorothy a classic couple?

Jerry Maguire and Dorothy Boyd, Scarlett O'Hare and Rhett Butler, Alvy Singer and Annie Hall, Bonnie and Clyde... I mean, so many couples that have been out there, portrayed by terrific actors with a very solid script and a great director; yet there are times in which one wonders how real it is. At the end of the day, we know that there are actors playing characters and that once "CUT" is yelled in the studio, it's all over. I guess chemistry has to be among the hardest emotions actors have to transmit on screen.

Harry Potter shares a decent chemistry.... or does he?

This got me thinking... and after pondering for a while, I asked myself: what are the best onscreen chemistry couple I have seen? The kind of chemistry that you look and say: "wow, these people really look like they are into each other"... or "praise the relationship portrayed by actor X and actress Y".. or even "what a wonderful set of emotions which I could totally feel connected with." I'm not talking about your usual Twilight/Matrix Reloaded/You've got mail kind of chemistry. I mean no offense, Keannu Reeves and Carrie-Ann Moss looked ok but nothing really special; I am an admirer of what a movie tries to represent and how the plot and characters can absorb viewers into it. 

Will Ghost make my list?
Stay tuned and find out!

So I decided to write a series of movies that in my opinion hold the best chemistry between two characters on screen. I'm not really into things like Top 10 or Top 5; I'll try to write about the ones that impacted me the most, without really looking into a specific fixed number. I hope you enjoy this homenage.

I want to appoint something: I'm not specifically talking about romantic movies per se. Any film with a couple makes it for me: adventure, comedy, drama, romance, sci fi. What I'm focusing is on the chemistry and not the genre.

So gosh, many movies with great couples:

Bonnie and Clyde

An affair to remember

Ghost

Sleepless in Seattle

Smokey and the Bandit

Speed

Casablanca

Life is beautiful

It's a wonderful life

Vertigo

Annie Hall

Jerry Maguire

....

...

..

which one would you nominate? Which one do you think I will include?

Testing my Movies, Television blog